I'm Tired of Condescending Politicians

I barely know where to begin with Eliot Spitzer's Slate column. Mr. Spitzer, who was born into wealth and subsequently received a salary from taxpayer money, writes this:

After reading the Gettysburg Address, don't the bleating self-important concerns of investment bankers whose multimillion-dollar bonuses might be jeopardized by a somewhat more rigorous regulatory structure seem downright offensive?

Never mind that investment bankers earn their money through voluntary exchange. It's not just bankers, though. Spitzer wants to impose his ideas on everyone.

The problems—from energy to educational achievement to financial reform to environmental degradation—that could be resolved with just a modicum of shared sacrifice are remarkable. Surely, as we enter a period of negative-sum decision-making, not positive-sum giveaways, we must understand—as President Lincoln beseeched us—that shared sacrifice, the shared shouldering of burdens, is the key to resolving our critical problems.

Is energy policy really the first thing he thinks of when he reads the Gettysburg Address? How is his vantage point such that he knows how to address every social problem? His admonishments-for spending too much, pushing problems onto future generations, avoiding obligations-are better advice for members of Congress than weary taxpayers.

I'm tired of being condescended to by paternalistic politicians. I think I'm going to go partake in more "sacrifice avoidance" instead.